Move Over Supreme Court: Rice Anoints Gonzales As “The Highest Legal Authority In The Country”
By on Dec 20th, 2005 at 10:27 am
Move Over Supreme Court: Rice Anoints Gonzales As “The Highest Legal Authority In The Country”
Last night in an interview with Wolf Blitzer, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice defended the president’s decision to authorize a warrantless domestic spying program:
The President spoke to this earlier and the Attorney General, who is, after all, the highest legal authority in the country, has spoken to this.
As any veteran of an 8th grade civics class can tell you, the highest legal authority in the country is the Supreme Court. Rice’s position illustrates the problem with this administration – the belief that the power of the executive is unchecked.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
209 Responses to “Move Over Supreme Court: Rice Anoints Gonzales As “The Highest Legal Authority In The Country””
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Bush Legacy
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
DADT
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Franken
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Krauthammer
Kyl
LGBT
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Sanford
Sotomayor
Steele
Supreme Court
Terrorism
ThinkProgress
Tiller
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Judd, you know what she meant, you lying weasel.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:31 amI think Condi got to involved with her work when she studied the Soviet Union. She know thinks this country is a Soviet power.
Jamie
December 20th, 2005 at 10:34 amhttp://intoxination.blogspot.com
Reasonable people now know Jamie is paranoid.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:35 amI love you too wallace. Just as a note, when you say "you know what she meant" you are conceeding my point is correct.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:36 amWwallace... if she meant what you think she meant, then she should have said it. However, she didn't. Admit it.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:37 amwwallace must be paid by the post by the right.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:38 amNo Judd, you know she did not mean what you're saying she meant. You are therefore not telling the truth.
The AG is the top law enforcement official in the government.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:39 amPHDs can also lie.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:40 amIf all is well in the country why are the markets doing so
poorly . Why are the jobs and industries going overseas . Why the Chinese , a communnist country own America .
Because we trust those liars ,those corrupt liars who put their personal interests and power ahead of the Nation's .
Yeah wwallace, perhaps you can explain what she actually MEANT since she clearly didn't actually tell us.
What exactly in Judd's post is a LIE? He quoted Condi, did she not really say that? Is it not true that we are taught in school (maybe not 8th grade for ALL, but certainly around that time) that the Supreme Court is the highest legal authority?
Perhaps it's what he said about the belief that the power of the executive is unchecked. Well that explain why this is THE MOST secretive administration in history?
And for the record, unlike Judd, I do NOT love wwallace.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:40 am"The AG is the top law enforcement official in the government."
Comment by wwallace — December 20, 2005 @ 10:39 am
But she said legal authority. You are putting words in her mouth. Yup, let it sink in.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:41 amthese people are just making this shit up as they go along...
you know, many a dictator has ignored the law and made excuses for why they did so... what's the difference here? there is none!
December 20th, 2005 at 10:42 amI guess it all depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is. LOL
December 20th, 2005 at 10:42 amuh...wallace? She didn't say "legal enforcement"...she said legal authority. Which is DEAD-WRONG. Legal authority, or interpretation of laws and dissection of their meaning, is NOT the AG's job.
So, she's wrong. She lied. Or bullsh!tted.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:43 am"you know, many a dictator has ignored the law and made excuses for why they did so…"
But enough about Clinton. Why do you liberals always bring up Clinton? LOL
December 20th, 2005 at 10:43 amAgain, wwallace resorts to cheap shots because he cannot defend his position. Alas.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:44 amThat's what blew me away, when the President said he ran the wiretapping issue through the Attorney General...the same man who called the Geneva Convention "quaint" and is all for torture. If I didn't know better, I'd wonder what country I'm in.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:46 am"The Attorney General appears in person to represent the Government before the Supreme Court in cases of exceptional importance. Under most circumstances the United States Solicitor General argues before the Supreme Court on the government's behalf." - Reference.com
"Attorneys General or Attorney Generals The chief law officer of a nation or state who represents the government in litigation and serves as its principal legal advisor" - Merrian Webster Dictionary
December 20th, 2005 at 10:46 amCorrection for clarity...
As any veteran of an 8th grade civics class can tell you, the highest legal authority in the country is the Supreme Court. Rice’s position illustrates the problem with this administration – the belief that the power of the *conservative Republican* executive is unchecked.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:47 amYou can not be higher than the Supreme Court if you are presenting a case in front of it.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:47 ambbrraawwcckkk...wwallace...here's a cracker
everyone else...continue with your thoughtful discussion
December 20th, 2005 at 10:48 amIf you are any other type of executive, you can just pound sand.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:48 amLook.
Everytime I come here, I love TP. But, it is always the Wwallace show. He is like the 8th grade punk that knows calling a girl a "bitch" will get him some attention, any attention.
Instead of spending anytime responding to him, can we continue to offer news, ideas, opinions, and humor?
Just a thought of mine as I am very tired of the Wwallace 8th Grade Follies.
-GSD
December 20th, 2005 at 10:48 amHey, if the preznit is appointed and annointed by God as he claims, then why shouldn't his AG be the highest authority in the land?
After all, our local mental midget, wwallace, spent all night yesterday repeating ad nauseam the preznit's line that the Constitution is just a piece of paper, so who the hell cares what it says about the Supreme Court?!?
Incidentally, I'm guessing Condi and wwallace would have a blast together -- they could go shopping for shoes, bash some minorities, have an ignorance contest, and then maybe kill some foreigners just for kicks. It'd be a hoot-and-a-half.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:48 amSo she misspoke? Who cares, she's still hot.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:49 amThe AG is the top law enforcement official in the government.
Bingo!
Not the one to interpret law or a trier of fact1
December 20th, 2005 at 10:49 amGod you know it's bad for them when they try to drag President Clinton into it.
They've don that alot lately.
Judd, why do you humor this guy? He doesn't move a conversation forward and always resorts to insults. There are lot's better righties out there. You just have to set the bar higher.
Off thread - I was lurking over at redstate this AM. Talk about Hitler youth. I have a hard time believing these people think they represent any form of democratic government I've been taught.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:50 am#
So she misspoke? Who cares, she’s still hot.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
You have permanent beer goggles on, man.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:50 amWell, I guess Bushie will get to appoint more conservative justices since the far left insists on fighting him on terror.
Is there a party for moderate Democrats who are socially liberal, but understand the consequences of NOT fighting the war on terror. This site is an embarrassment to Democrats.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:50 amWould someone please just tell this gap-toothed, over-priced shoe-buyin' tool of the Rethuglican right, to just shut up. PhD.s not only lie, they aren't necessarily all that smart when they open their yaps to begin with.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:51 amHe is the highest law enforcement official, not the highest legal authority. His job is to enforce law, not to interpret it.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:54 amwwallace: you're not too bright are you? Are you trying to guess what Condi meant when she said Gonzalez is the highest legal authority? In what way is that true? Article III of the U.S. Constitution puts all judicial power in the Supreme Court and the court system. That means the courts interpret the law-- the executive branch is there to carry out and enforce the laws.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:55 amconvenient constructionism
December 20th, 2005 at 10:55 am#22
GSD
You know, I like to debate like most of us do, and will give a few of the cons credit with trying... but wallace isn't here to debate. You're right, he's only here to disrupt and annoy for attention.
I have found in high school that by removing kids like him from the class, chaos disappears and the rest of the perios actually is productive. While I will personally continue to debate people like Giacomo and Michael, because I think they are trying to have dialog, I am with you and will join your wallace boycott.
No more conversations with wallace from me, unless he can act like an adult and participate in the dialog.
Impeach Bush!
Ignore wwwallace!
December 20th, 2005 at 10:56 am#24
So she misspoke? Who cares, she’s still hot.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
I-RIGHT-I, you do know that she's black, right? You openly hate black people...
December 20th, 2005 at 10:57 amAs a member of the "far left" (my poor mother) I'm all for fighting terrorists. Which is why I'm pissed off that we're wasting time in Iraq and we have a moron at the helm who doesn't believe in preserving and protecting the Constitution of the United States, which is his REAL job.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:58 amwwallace who?
December 20th, 2005 at 10:58 amMagnitude 4.2 NEW MEXICO December 19, 2005
December 20th, 2005 at 10:59 amhttp://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqinthenews/2005/usgva8/
This administration is so vague or general in thier statements, the points can easily be argued on both sides.
Maybe Bush did act within "the law", however, these people are pushing limits further than ever before. Pushing of the limits is what the problem is. It's like a Borderline Personality Administration. Always manipulating, pushing boundaries and limits, never admitting to a mistake, acting childish, getting angry when they don't get thier way.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:59 amI-RIGHT-I is another FOOL and should be considered dead.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:00 am#
Well, I guess Bushie will get to appoint more conservative justices since the far left insists on fighting him on terror.
Is there a party for moderate Democrats who are socially liberal, but understand the consequences of NOT fighting the war on terror. This site is an embarrassment to Democrats.
Comment by Oh My — December 20, 200
That's OK, Mehlman talking point trollbot #0040642. Bush is an embarassment to all conservatives, Americans of any political mind, Democracy and freedom, and the world.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:00 amBy Dan Balz and Richard Morin
Updated: 8:53 a.m. ET Dec. 20, 2005
December 20th, 2005 at 11:01 amPresident Bush's approval rating has surged in recent weeks, reversing what had been an extended period of decline, with Americans now expressing renewed optimism about the future of democracy in Iraq, the campaign against terrorism and the U.S. economy, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News Poll.
How Tyranny Came to America *
December 20th, 2005 at 11:04 amhttp://www.sobran.com/tyranny.shtml
Life After Tyranny
http://www.simonbone.com/
Off topic, but dealing with legal issues.... A JUDGE RULED AGAINST TEACHING RELIGIOUS IDEAS IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL!
December 20th, 2005 at 11:04 amA REAL AMERICAN is back in the house, fools. Recognize. Obviously, Ms. Rice was taken completely out of context here. You can interpret what she said in many different ways. But you KOOL AID drinking (yes, I like Bill O'Reilly), anti-American, neo-communist, judicial fascist pukes will only see things your way. The President is trying to protect us, idiots. Personnally, I think we need to go back to the good old days of FDR, that great progressive Democrat that he was, and intern all Muslim males in this country who have even the most vague connection to Middle Eastern Terrorists. It will be 1941 all over again. But this is WAR, and anything should be acceptable that protects the population. You fools won't be happy until a nuclear bomb is detonated in one of our major cities.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:05 amThis fellow, named reformed troll baiter, said it better than I ever could. In response to another GOP troll at this thread at Attytood.
He responds to this talking point drivel from some clod named SBVFT (Short Bus Veterans for Truth)....
"This war has the possibility of being the biggest one ever. All it will take is one nuke in the hands of the Islamofascists..."
NO. The same rules of realpolitik that governed during the Cold War still apply except now the Assured Destruction is not Mutual. No state will risk it's very existence to allow the fanatics the opportunity to build such a weapon. These boogeymen should not have taken anything like 4 years to corner and finsh off.
The current administration is corrupt and incompetent and not up to the task.
Further they have broken the law and violated the Constitution. Do you know what the 4th ammendment is?
Strangely. they lie just like the old Soviets used to -we used to think it laughable and crude - now I realize it actually works. That these weasels get a second term to loot the treasury and murder thousands of Iraqis and put good American kids at risk for halliburton and bechtel and oil is unconscionable.
Go read the bios of the American soldiers who die every day. It's interesting how they are all of a kind. The very best kind. The very best in America is embodied in these people. Uniformly it seems they are volunteers in their communities, contributors before they entered the service to get an education paid for. Communities that are far poorer for their loss. The injured and maimed go home though. Many have psychological problems for life.
And for what? Your handful of bearded men who want to take over the world? They can't! They can blow up discos and trainstations and catch us sleeping every now and then but that is all and with due dilligence the money can be cut off. Their activities can be minimized.
China on the other hand are busy taking over the world while people bicker over non-issues. They have 3 more years to feast on the fat of the land.
tax cuts for the rich - budget cuts yesterday for you and your grandma. Happy holidays!
December 20th, 2005 at 11:05 amThank You for Wiretapping
December 20, 2005; Page A14
Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold wants to be President, and that's fair enough. By all means go for it in 2008. The same applies to Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican who's always on the Sunday shows fretting about the latest criticism of the Bush Administration's prosecution of the war on terror. But until you run nationwide and win, Senators, please stop stripping the Presidency of its Constitutional authority to defend America.
That is the real issue raised by the Beltway furor over last week's leak of National Security Agency wiretaps on international phone calls involving al Qaeda suspects. The usual assortment of Senators and media potentates is howling that the wiretaps are "illegal," done "in total secret," and threaten to bring us a long, dark night of fascism. "I believe it does violate the law," averred Mr. Feingold on CNN Sunday.
The truth is closer to the opposite. What we really have here is a perfect illustration of why America's Founders gave the executive branch the largest measure of Constitutional authority on national security. They recognized that a committee of 535 talking heads couldn't be trusted with such grave responsibility. There is no evidence that these wiretaps violate the law. But there is lots of evidence that the Senators are "illegally" usurping Presidential power -- and endangering the country in the process.
http://terpsboy.com/Articles/Wiretapping.html
This is just the beginning losers. Next comes the Star Chamber. In a time of war the party in power is the highest legal authority in the nation. Just ask FDR who had traitors shot and a million American citizens of Japanese descent put in concentration camps all with just a signature.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:05 am#26
Off thread - I was lurking over at redstate this AM. Talk about Hitler youth. I have a hard time believing these people think they represent any form of democratic government I’ve been taught.
Comment by kindness — December 20, 2005 @ 10:50 am
You guys might find this interesting. I read a book by a Cultural Antropology who explained why people hold fast to such notions. He says that because the human species has evolved such a large brain, we must be born prior to it's full development in order to be born (ouch). As a result, the first 5-6 years of life, the brain is still developing. So, while this growth occurs, there's a period of cultural indoctrination that becomes as nearly engrained into the brain as it's actual neurological system istelf. And that as a result people see the world through these cultural filters. They don't know any differently how to 'see' because they only experienced their view.
So, because of ths cultural programming in the youth, and the inability to see outside of their own perspective, these radical people sincerely believe that they are right.
However, there is the possibility of someone changing their viewpoint (I did - had conservative roots), but it's extremely difficult and it has to be wanted. It's why they flock together at Red State and we are in here. The difference is that we don't want to force them to live our way... And people like wallace are here because they do.
Just thought that was interesting in understanding how we can all look at the exact same thing and some see it so differently from others.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:06 am#
Off topic, but dealing with legal issues…. A JUDGE RULED AGAINST TEACHING RELIGIOUS IDEAS IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL!
Comment by Magnum DB —
Activist judges! Liberal New York Times! What's next?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:07 amI-RIGHT-I, you do know that she’s black, right? You openly hate black people…
Comment by unbelievable
I most certainly do not hate black people. I dated one once, so there.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:07 amHey Think Progress. I google searched"Propaganda and tyranny"'
Someone had the ordasity to Put your WEBSITE UNDER THIS TITLE!
SHAME ON THEM ALL!
Tip: Save time by hitting the return key instead of clicking on "search"
FIRE: Propaganda the Tyranny Of Words
Tyranny Of Words. What is black and white and red all over? ... Where does the
propaganda come from? I've thought about that long and hard. ...
fire.salmonriver.com/culture/propaganda.html - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
Think Progress » Lieberman Flashback: Questioning Bush’s ...
This is Propaganda and tyranny at its best. Comment by Swords of Righteousness
... Propaganda and Tyranny was Used By all WAR Thugs, Micheal and plunger. ...
thinkprogress.org/2005/12/10/lieberman-flashback/ - 100k - Dec 18, 2005 - Cached - Similar pages
Think Progress » Shame on Yoo
December 20th, 2005 at 11:08 amOnce again this is a fruedian slip on Condi's part akin to her calling bush her husband. I am sure that condi would like Gonzalez to be the supreme lawe enforcement, it would certianly make life easier for the Bush admin.
The wire tapping issue is strange. One of the main reasons for figting the revolutianary war, was protection from illegal search and seizure. And if the ones that were wiretapped were involved with terrorists, I am pretty sure that any judge would grant the right to wire tap their phones, and bug their offices. The only difference being that the officials running the surveillence might have to wait a day.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:08 am#28
Is there a party for moderate Democrats who are socially liberal, but understand the consequences of NOT fighting the war on terror. This site is an embarrassment to Democrats.
Comment by Oh My — December 20, 2005 @ 10:50 am
Perhaps if you understood that we helped ignite the terrorist attacks by training Al Qaeda to use military violence to solve their problems, you'd understand that the "War on Terror" is not solved with more violence. Life is frequently counterintuitive to the Judeo-Christian culture of fighting fire with fire. Fire plus more fire just equals a bigger fire. The way to squelch a fire is with it's opposite - water.
You should read up on Gandhi and how ge defeated British occupation of India without violence. You'd maybe understand why we oppose more violence.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:10 amHowever, there is the possibility of someone changing their viewpoint (I did - had conservative roots), but it’s extremely difficult and it has to be wanted. It’s why they flock together at Red State and we are in here. The difference is that we don’t want to force them to live our way… And people like wallace are here because they do.
I'd wager that life and circumstances and experience changed your viewpoint. Those are the best teachers.
He says that because the human species has evolved such a large brain, we must be born prior to it’s full development in order to be born (ouch).
Ouch? Don't tell me.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:10 amSCOTUS versus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney_General#United_States> the US Attorney General
Hmm...nope, not seeing "highest law enforcement offical" in that definition. . .in FACT, the AG may represent the government in DEFENSE to the Supreme Court. If the AG was the highest law enforcer (or even legal authority as Condi put it) then wouldn't the Supreme Court have to defend its decisions and rulings to the AG? Well? Can ANYONE explain that? It doesn't seem to make sense to a "rational, reasoning" person.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:10 amTruth, accuracy and rationality are irrelevant to the administration and their propaganda machine because the MSM will often repeat what they say without question, and Rush, Hannity, etc., will always pick it up as ordained by god. We just react to the "new realities" they create, so they create them at a rate that makes it impossible to keep up. It's a brilliant, though irreprehensible, strategy.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:11 amAnd while we are on the subject of protecting America......... All you nitwits complain that Bush isn't doing enough to protect the country, we are wasting resources in Iraq, blah, blah, blah. All the while, you are undermining the administrations attempts at protecting America by cursing the NSA program to moniter suspect's phone calls, and now Dick-head Durbin and the rest of jackass Senate Democrats are killing the Patriot act, further weakening our ability to fight the terrorists. Thanks, again, jerk-offs.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:11 amPerhaps if you understood that we helped ignite the terrorist attacks by training Al Qaeda to use military violence to solve their problems, you’d understand that the “War on Terror†is not solved with more violence. Life is frequently counterintuitive to the Judeo-Christian culture of fighting fire with fire. Fire plus more fire just equals a bigger fire. The way to squelch a fire is with it’s opposite - water.
That's all well and good but the Soviet Union was not Britain. We are more like the Soviet Union than Britain in our style and manner than we are like the British, who did empire and colonialism very well, but gave it up because it just wasn't worth it. We have become the evil empire we fought. Beware that in fighting monsters, you do not become one.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:13 am#29
Would someone please just tell this gap-toothed, over-priced shoe-buyin’ tool of the Rethuglican right, to just shut up. PhD.s not only lie, they aren’t necessarily all that smart when they open their yaps to begin with.
Comment by buzzbike — December 20, 2005 @ 10:51 am
We can't group all Phds together any more than we can all liberals (see the post above yours).
Any while I mean no disrespect to anyone with a lot of education (I have three degrees myself), I have found that in high school, the smartest kids are the ones who are labeled trouble makers for refusing to follow a system of rules that they find homogenizing and inane. It's the ones who are obedient of the system who are promoted and graded highly. In Condoleeza Rice's case, whe was a good little girl who followed the rules, played by an arbitrary system (each school and each educator has his or her own agenda after all), and was rewarded for it. She's not any smarter than anyone else, and I'd actually bet on the opposite based on her remarks here.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:15 amI have better things to do today than listen to these shrill trolls spin this one. It's a fait accompli. he's toast and he knows it and they know it and that's why they are here. This is a good time to ignore them and let them sweat.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:16 amA REAL ASSHOLE, CARRY YOUR SO CALLED PATHETIC PATRIOSM OVER TO IRAQ AND STAY THERE! MAYBE YOU CAN CONVINCE THEM HOW GREAT FREEDOM IS!,DUMBASS!
December 20th, 2005 at 11:16 amwwallace cannot understand the difference between 'legal authority' and 'legal enforcer'. It's slightly amusing that his last post was to blame Clinton - that's generally a wingnut's last ditch effort to save their 'argument'.
I am a bit curious why TP has not instituted an 'ignore' function. It's obvious wwallace has TP on RSS and is constantly online - he also appears to be in several other forums. It'd be rather simple and rather effective at fostering some real debate.
Off topic/troll behavior should be moderated more than it is at present. I am not suggesting 'censorship' but I am suggesting that Judd moves to keep the threads on topic.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:17 amI don't understand why our congressional leaders are allowing him (and her) to drag them down in the mud with them. Condi, who was the National Security Advisor should have had his back, at least, and obtained the warrants after he initiated the surveillance (how I wish this thing had spell check!).
This administration has twisted every amendment, clause, paragraph of our laws and constitution to try and defend their illegal behavior. After they blatantly claim they've done something, they continue on as if everyone else is wrong.
As each day goes by, I'm thinking our democracy was lost a long time ago. If we can't get another party in place to speak for the majority of the American people, who happen to be 'in the middle', then maybe it will be time to start looking at other countries to move to. That's what our founding fathers did; moved elsewhere to relieve themselves from the tyranny of the aristocracy.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:17 amThe Right seems to be stuck in fear mode. Talking about nuclear bombs, threats, getting killed if we don't sacrifice our Constitution.
Are you people really that afraid? Or is it just a way to sell your ideas. Almost all ads on TV use fear to sell products. "Something bad will happen if you don't buy this".
December 20th, 2005 at 11:17 am#57-
You make me ill. Our country has liberated untold hundreds of millions of people from tyranny in the last 100 years, and spread democracy and freedom across the globe. We give more in charitable contributions to the world, than half of the world's other countries combined. And we are the new "evil empire"? Do us all a favor and emigrate to Canada, where you belong.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:17 am#56. GO TO HELL.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:18 amI know this is off topic, but what does MSM stand for?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:18 amThanks.
Well, that I'd like to know. What are your degrees in? Education is like anything else. You make of it what you will.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:18 amMSM =Main Stream Media
December 20th, 2005 at 11:19 am#60-
Been there, done that. Plus, the Iraqis already know how great freedom is. Did you totally miss the election last week? Probably so. You most likely had your head buried in Left-wing, neo-facist websites like this, and missed everything. Get a grip, butthead.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:19 amSCLM =So Called Liberal Media
December 20th, 2005 at 11:20 am# 64.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:20 am
December 20th, 2005 at 11:21 am
Been there, done that. Plus, the Iraqis already know how great freedom is. Did you totally miss the election last week? Probably so. You most likely had your head buried in Left-wing, neo-facist websites like this, and missed everything. Get a grip, butthead.
Comment by A REAL AMERICAN
Sure, been there, done that. Everyone else is getting to come home early too, right? Cuz it's going so well, and all...
December 20th, 2005 at 11:21 amFor Truth (and a bioloical/nuclear attack)-
You fail to understand the stakes here. Look at history. NATIONS HAVE TO SACRIFICE SOME CIVIL LIBERTIES IN THE SHORT TERM IN ORDER TO TRIUMPH IN WAR. That is the unfortunate truth. All your civil liberties aren't worth a damn if you are DEAD.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:22 am#65 - My thinking exactly, Army Vet.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:23 am#49
I most certainly do not hate black people. I dated one once, so there.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 20, 2005 @ 11:07 am
I've read you post messages condone killing them simply for their skin color... There were even some recent racial epithets in one of recent these threads.
If you dated someone who was black, then you'd know how much they detest the use of the 'N' word, and you wouln't throw it around so frequently. I'm not sure I believe you on this. It doesn't fit with your general philosophies. And I don't know any of my female friends who are black who would date a white conservative pig. They hate Condi for being a 'modern slave to the Man' (their words).
December 20th, 2005 at 11:23 amPEOPLE ! PEOPLE !
Why argue with someone of closed mind . You cannot change them with reasonnable well thoughtout and factual argument .
December 20th, 2005 at 11:23 amThey are men ,or women of faith . Faith of their leader .
they are brainwashed , they do not want to think , they have surrended their free will in total blindness . They are no longer human beeings . They are vegetables . They stand up in front of the mirror every morning wind their robotic mind and clicki their boots , erect thei right arm in front of them they shout :heil Hitler , Heil Bush
Sing eil und deutschland uber alles.
Is there a party for moderate Democrats who are socially liberal, but understand the consequences of NOT fighting the war on terror. This site is an embarrassment to Democrats.
Comment by Oh My
Yes, it's called the Republican Party.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:24 am# 69.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:25 amYou call Over 30,000 Dead Iraqis and Over 2000 Americanas a SUCCESS? DUMBASS, I WAS THERE, I HAD CLOSE ENCOUNTERS WITH RPGs AND Mortar Rounds, They do NOT love YOU! !
lets see a republican controlled senate that cannot get the votes needed to pass the patriot act.
nevermind the facts, its always the dems who are responsible.
how far are you willing to go to protect the country ARA? maybe we should appoint bush president until the crisis is over? How much of what makes america, america are you willing to lose to "protect us"?
some of the more inflammatory statements from some of the right wing supporters here include such things as locking up or killing anyone who does not agree with Bush. ( not the government, but bush) hanging all democratic senators and congressmen as traitors etc.
Freedom is not Free, but we already fought a war against an unjust government, we should not have to do it again.
on a seperate topic. I would like to request of judd that anyone who's post seems to be made up of name calling, and I mean anyone should have thier comments deleted. I don't call names in my post and I am tired of being told I am a moron and a jerkoff.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:25 amWe have two regular posters using RSS to disrupt he threads. Simply ignoring them would be more effective than responding to personal/hateful/baseless attacks. It accomplishes their aim of making some of us look stupid/intolerant and moving the thread off topic.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:25 amWhy argue with someone of closed mind . You cannot change them with reasonnable well thoughtout and factual argument .
They are men ,or women of faith
[...]
They stand up in front of the mirror every morning wind their robotic mind and clicki their boots , erect thei right arm in front of them they shout :heil Hitler , Heil Bush
Sing eil und deutschland uber alles.
Comment by hardass
You don't get it do you. Our minds are closed to the rantings of idiots like you.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:26 amArmyVet/KillCon-
Are you going to attempt to refute any of my arguements, or just name call? That's right, I forgot. All you liberals can do in the face of fact and logic is name call. And ArmyVet, what job did you have in the military? You sound like an Ash-and-Trash kind of guy.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:26 am#80
Email Judd requesting an ignore function. At least banning their handles would be nice. So would optional registration.
Deleting personal attacks is only effective if a moderator has nonstop time to monitor the threads. If they don't there will already be a dozen replies. TP could start making some users moderators, I suppose, as the nation does but it would be more effective simply to ban handles and implement registration (eventually moving to mandatory).
December 20th, 2005 at 11:27 am#64
The only thing constant is change. You seem to be living in the "good ol' days", Yes our country has done many a great thing, however, I ask, what great thing have we done in the last, going on 40 years? I am talking about truly great things, like going to the moon. (Computers were invented in the 50's)
So many conservatives live in the post WWII mindset. Well if you pull your head out long enough, things have not been that way for a long time, you are living on the greatness of our past, we have become great at greed, and arrogance. The crap going on by this current admin would never fly 50 years ago.
(Computers were invented in the 50's)
December 20th, 2005 at 11:28 am#53
I’d wager that life and circumstances and experience changed your viewpoint. Those are the best teachers.
Ouch? Don’t tell me.
Comment by KillCon2006 — December 20, 2005 @ 11:10 am
Hi KillCon,
Absolutely. That and wondering why I was so unhappy living like that. Hate and judgment are exhaustive to carry around. Traveling was a big part of it, too - which is experience as you pointed out. And then I moved to California where no one knew me and I could decide for myself who I wanted to be. And I chose this side, consciously. Much, much happier.
Sorry... my sister-in-law just had a baby yesterday and I kept telling my brother that I didn't want the details either :).
How's your week going?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:30 am#83.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:30 amIgnorant Asshole, Everyone has it! But, You take the Cake!
attempt to refute any of my Ignorant arguements.
There is no arguement.
You are a stupid Ignorant Propagander for the Rightwingnutjobs!
#83
you have no arguments. You simply resort to personal attacks. Therefore there is nothing to refute on an intellectual level - and most of us do not wish to stoop to yours. There's the blame clinton, liberals are stupid/weak/traitors/etc, a liberal can't have been a service person (despite the fact that most of the Iraq vets running for Congress are democrats...witness the woman who lost both legs in a helicopter crash in Iraq yesterday on TP/Daily Kos).
Perhaps you were in the military. Perhaps I was. Perhaps Army Vet was. Frankly it's irrelevent. I am not going to give you or any one else (yes including on the left) any more deference simply because they served/are serving in the armed forces. Each citizen is equal and each citizen must equally respect the law. Including our dear commander in chief.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:32 am#85-
The only thing constant is change? I think not. Many of the methodologies we use to execute a war have changed, yes. But one thing has not. Intelligence is the key to winning. It was like that 100 years ago, and it is like that today. The Democrats are crippling our efforts at gathering intelligence of this most elusive of enemies. That is the truth, and we are going to learn the hard way.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:32 amthe thing that bugs me the most is the level of persanol attacks on both sides. we can use facts and argue positions without name calling.
I do think that WwallaceW, I-right-I/A real american? are doing thier best to disrupt any sort of conversation. there is very little fact, or opinion, and a lot of baseless name calling. wallace jumped into it on this thread first thing calling judd a liar.
my impression so far is that they will simply spout whatever the current defense is, that they heard from limbaugh, o'rielly, coulter, whoever, instead of spending some time doing critical thinking.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:33 am#57
We have become the evil empire we fought. Beware that in fighting monsters, you do not become one.
Comment by KillCon2006 — December 20, 2005 @ 11:13 am
I think we already have. Modern history suggests it. I just hope we can show the monster a mirror to see the truth, and then teach it some manners and humility. The arrogant righteousness of our current Administration is only making matters worse...
December 20th, 2005 at 11:34 am#85
"The crap going on by this current admin would never fly 50 years ago."
You have opened yourself up for an attack by the wingnuts. Presidents abused Executive Orders more frequently during and after World War II b/c of the 'communist threat'. While this pales in comparison it is only discussed because people now do not want a dictator for a 'president'.
It is about time that the 3rd branch of government address, at least in a limited respect, the power of the executive branch. There are many hundreds of secret executive orders - many of which would probably appall us. It's been an issue for both Republicans and Democrats - only now we have intelligence personnel willing to 'leak' to the 4th 'arm' of the government.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:35 amnot exactly sure how preventing a wiretap that some could get legally is damaging the war on terror?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:36 am#90
Funniest thing I've read in a long time. Republican's couldn't gather intelligence if they went to grade school as shown by the Pres admitting that the intelligence that the Repubs got prior to the invasion of Iraq was WRONG. Getting the 'intelligence' to say what you want it to say is NOT INTELLIGENCE and the Democrats had nothing to do with that. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you are the funniest american. I will give you that.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:36 am#88-
I'm not asking for deference. If you will look back, you will see that ArmyVet is the one who brought the whole military service thing up in the first place. You are right, it is irrelevant. But again, it is impossible to refute anything I have said here. You people aren't even trying, because everything I have said IS TRUE. THE DEMOCRATS ARE KILLING OUR WAR EFFORT. And dead bodies in the streets of one our cities is going to be the consequence. I say again, CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE NOT WORTH SHIT IF YOU ARE DEAD.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:36 am#89.
You are right to say"and we are going to learn the hard way. "
And, That is the truth.
16 ¶ And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17
December 20th, 2005 at 11:38 am
A real american would not look upon the destruction of the constitution as okay as long as its in the name of fighting terror.
again if the wiretaps could be gotten legally why the end run around the justice system?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:38 am#64
#57-
You make me ill. Our country has liberated untold hundreds of millions of people from tyranny in the last 100 years, and spread democracy and freedom across the globe. We give more in charitable contributions to the world, than half of the world’s other countries combined. And we are the new “evil empire� Do us all a favor and emigrate to Canada, where you belong.
Comment by A REAL AMERICAN — December 20, 2005 @ 11:17 am
Wow, I haven't met anyone living in a Nuclear Fallout shelter who just emerged after reading propagandized fairytales about the world. I thought that only happened in really bad movies...
Well, reality check, read "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn and let's see how quickly you move to Canada.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:39 amI am afraid you do not understand that democrats are not 'crippling' attempts at intelligence gathering. FISA allows for retroactive warrants and was approved by Congress in 78 and modified in 01 via HR 2883 to allow for 72 rather than 24 hour retroactive warrants.
Democrats are not in control of either the House or the Senate. If the President felt that his intelligence powers were not strong enough, he should ask the Congress to pass an ammendment to FISA or draft another bill.
The bottom line is that there are 3 branches of government, not 1. If the president has a problem with the laws as written he can go to the congress for a new law or the Supreme Court for an interpretation. The Supreme Court would have granted Bush an emergency hearing and the FISA issue would have been resolved in a week or two.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:39 amReal American,
You have demonstrated your arrogance by refusing to see that things change no matter what. Continue your denial, stay the course.
Things have changed so much, that the Right feels the Constitution is outdated, and no longer applies.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:39 amBut see, that's the problem with this country - the power of the Executive IS unchecked! Congress certainily won't reign in the Pres. They're all for this. COngress and the press will try to put spin on this issue.
The NY Times had this story a year ago. They deliberately sat on it. Why? They are complicit.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:39 am#89.
RERead your COMMENTS!
The Democrats are crippling our efforts at gathering intelligence of this most elusive of enemies.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:41 amThink before you type, please. save space.
#97-
Good question, I'll give you that. I was actually wondering the same thing myself. It is most likely due to the extreme slowness of the justice system. From what I understand, the acutal process of apply for and recieving permission to wiretap is so slow, that by the time you got such permission, the opportunity would be gone.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:41 amDeleting personal attacks is only effective if a moderator has nonstop time to monitor the threads. If they don’t there will already be a dozen replies. TP could start making some users moderators, I suppose, as the nation does but it would be more effective simply to ban handles and implement registration (eventually moving to mandatory).
Comment by James
If you delete the personal attacks there won't be much here from the Left for you to read. Ask Ryan how many of his posts have been deleted recently. My guess is that saves them about $50 a week in bandwidth charges.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:41 am#65
#56. GO TO HELL.
Comment by Army Vet — December 20, 2005 @ 11:18 am
Such wit! Such expose! Such intelligent use of teh miilions of words inteh English language! Think those up yourself???
My dad taught me that when a person reached the height of his intelliegent he resorts to using curse words. Wow, you got maybe half an inch off the ground with that dazzling brilliance of yours.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:41 amI would suspect that they were afriad of the bush admin a year ago. However with his popularity dwindling, and the massive ruptures of all of illegal and unethical behavior, they are most likely not afraid of Bush much anymore
December 20th, 2005 at 11:42 amYour 'argument', while not stated, is that in order to avoid 'dead bodies in the street' the president should do whatever he pleases, including violating USSC and probably the Constitution.
You are, in effect, arguing that America needs a form of dictatorship for protection. America has always faced the prospect of 'dead bodies in the street'. We faced the prospect of wholescale nuclear holocaust during the Cold War. We didn't give the president supreme power and we ejected one for thinking he had them.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:42 amReal American,
You have demonstrated your arrogance by refusing to see that things change no matter what. Continue your denial, stay the course.
Things have changed so much, that the Right feels the Constitution is outdated, and no longer applies.
Comment by For Truth
Oh, you mean that we now think of it as a "living breathing document"? Where have I heard that before? From you, that's where.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:43 am#99-
Any attempt by the Congress to do as you say would undoubtably be fillibustered by the Democrats, and you know it.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:43 amWhat bothers me most about the left and their allies in the MSM is that they are headlining the story "Bush eavesdropping on Americans". Do they consider suspected terrorists to be American? I would argue that makes someone un-American?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:43 am#69
Been there, done that. Plus, the Iraqis already know how great freedom is. Did you totally miss the election last week? Probably so. You most likely had your head buried in Left-wing, neo-facist websites like this, and missed everything. Get a grip, butthead.
Comment by A REAL AMERICAN — December 20, 2005 @ 11:19 am
Guess you missed the reality that the Iraqis want us out of their country, eh? Really, television doesn't show news.
And you should look up the word fascist... I don't think you understand what it means.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:44 amYOU DO NOT HAVE TO WAIT FOR A WARRANT.
How hard is this to understand? You start spying on a person/persons and after 72 hours your apply for a warrant with the FISA court. After a period you get a hearing and then a decision. The warrant becomes retroactive.
Slowness is not a factor. While you wait for FISA you have a warrant with a scope as broad as you please.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:45 amSaying that the process to get a wiretap is too slow, so don't bother, is like saying waiting for a red light is too slow, so don't bother.
The system can be adjusted, or set up to expedite wire taps, don't just give it the finger.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:45 amLook ,Why Not just go Get Osama Bin Laden , Bring Him Back to the States, Prosecute and put him on Trial for 911, Then the truth will come out, Dont you think?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:46 amRecent Earthquake Activity in the USA
Magnitude 3.0 - LOUISIANA
December 20th, 2005 at 11:48 am2005 December 20 00:52:20 UTC
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/recenteqs/
114,
Why do you think Saddam's lawyers were killed? It's an example to any new lawyers, "Keep your mouth shut about the US involvements with Saddam"
December 20th, 2005 at 11:48 am#74
For Truth (and a bioloical/nuclear attack)-
You fail to understand the stakes here. Look at history. NATIONS HAVE TO SACRIFICE SOME CIVIL LIBERTIES IN THE SHORT TERM IN ORDER TO TRIUMPH IN WAR. That is the unfortunate truth. All your civil liberties aren’t worth a damn if you are DEAD.
Comment by A REAL AMERICAN — December 20, 2005 @ 11:22 am
Let's see - one attack on American soil in nearly 230 years and this requires extreme paranoia and pre-emptive attacks?
You wouldn't have to give up anything if our military wasn't so busy playing world police. Plus, the Founding Fathers wouldn't agree with you. Hence their numerous quotes about prefering death to lack of freedom...
Seriously, do you people not read? This country was founded on the belief that civil liberties are NOT negotiable.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:48 am"Any attempt by the Congress to do as you say would undoubtably be fillibustered by the Democrats, and you know it."
Again, your argument does not stand. Just as the republicans can move to end filibusters on judicial nominees without 60 votes, only a simple majority, so too can they do it on a specific issue regarding, say, FISA.
So, you end endless debate. The republicans can do that if they feel the American people would agree with their move.
And no, democrats wouldn't have filibustered it. If it had been included in the Patriot Act it would have passed. If the American peope WANT what you say they NEED then congress should give it to them - even if it means ending filibusters for such issues.
Obviously that isn't the case - no one is talking about doing it. Your own compadres are a bit disturbed about what's going on.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:48 amI truly don't understand this "civil liberties don't mean anything if your dead" crap. I can only assume that Patrick Henry, the patriot who played a pivotal role in starting the American revolution, who lead a militia in fighting the British to when civil liberties for Americans, who helped lead the first Continental Congress, who is most famous for his words, "Give me liberty or give me death!", might call into question this jerk's use of the name A REAL AMERICAN".
A true patriotic American would treasure the civil liberties so many men and women paid a heavy price for to win and keep.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:49 am#108-
You are saying that WE think the Constitution no longer applies? Please! Democrat activist judges have rendered the Constitution completely irrelevant with thier absurd "interpretations". We are govern by the consent of the people. A quick lesson, in case you forgot. 1) We elect representatives to posts in the government. 2) Those representatives act on the behest of their constituents. 3) Process repeats itself. However, lately, judicial facist judges have added a forth step: 4) Activist judge overrules will of people. Recognize that that Democrats are the ones who are trampling on the Constitution.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:49 am#113
Instead of responding to his erroneous claims that the 'warrant process is too slow' you would do well to realize that FISA allows for retroactive warrants - you can initiate a surveillance operation without a warrant IMMEDIATELY and lodge a warrant request 72 hours later. While the hearing is ongoing the warrantless operation keeps on going.
THERE IS NO WAITING PERIOD UNDER CURRENT LAW. Is this too hard to understand? Read Section 314 of HR 2883 'Technical Ammendments'. Prior to HR 2883 in 2001 there was a 24 hour period.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:51 am#82
You don’t get it do you. Our minds are closed to the rantings of idiots like you.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 20, 2005 @ 11:26 am
Then why ever are you here? Please, enlighten us with more of your complimenting wit...
December 20th, 2005 at 11:51 amA true patriotic American would treasure the civil liberties so many men and women paid a heavy price for to win and keep.
Comment by MarcWW
We do. That's why we're tapping you phone.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:52 amReal American,
You are stuck in fear mode. You must have an upset stomach, carrying around all that fear. Oh yeah, people like me make your stomach upset, right?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:53 am"A quick lesson, in case you forgot. 1) We elect representatives to posts in the government. 2) Those representatives act on the behest of their constituents. 3) Process repeats itself. However, lately, judicial facist judges have added a forth step: 4) Activist judge overrules will of people. Recognize that that Democrats are the ones who are trampling on the Constitution."
Okay, so 1. the judges haven't ruled on the scope of Bush's powers. Your argument that the liberal, activist judges have hurt national security in this issue is flawed. 2. "representatives act on the behest of their constituents". If you believe that to be the case, then those representatives would modify the FISA law to give Bush further authority. Obviously you don't trust the people because those same reps won't modify FISA. So...it's up to the president to be the sole protector/representative of the american people?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:53 amThe President spoke to this earlier
What a joke that line is. As if something junior said has any significance.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:55 amRice has sold her soul to the Bush Admin.
You can tell, she has snake eyes.
I'll tell you, I don't even know why I am slumming this hack website. It really doesn't matter what you fools say, it really doesn't. We, the Republican, conservative majority will keep winning every election as long as you have people like Clinton, Kerry, Kennedy, Durbin, Reid, and the rest of those schmucks running your party. All this crap flying around in here is just a waste of time. Get some moderates to take back your party, and then we'll have a serious discussion.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:56 amIf you will remember these same 'liberal, activist judges' did allow for enemy combatant designations. That's hardly siding with the ACLU. That seems to endorsed Bush's idea of that area of presidential powers.
Move on from the judges. Move back to the representatives. Why bring them up? They make the laws, Bush enforces them. If they don't feel like making a law for Bush, Bush can't make his own.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:56 amI truly believe that IRI is a closet liberal who assumes hysterically extreme right-wing viewpoints as some form of satire.
Were you tapping my computer, so you knew what I was typing before I posted it?
December 20th, 2005 at 11:57 am#103, you must have the standard method for obtaining a wire tap with the governments FISA process. All that they have to do is ask, and the judge signs it. It does not take days or even hours in a lot of cases.
You should really look into this if you think that wire tapes via FISA is slow. They can get them anytime they want without any delay.
Now a civilian wire tap, yes that can take days to obtain. But we are not talking about our local police station trying to catch a drug dealer with the standard process. The government created FISA for this very reason and it is setup so that the government can have their authorization in no time what so ever.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:58 amThe problem is, that this administration went to war without a good reason.
To them the reasons were good: get the oil, have excuses to take away civil liberties, make billions of dollars in war profits, take out the guy who wanted to kill my daddy, etc. And the "time of war" excuse now can be used for the forseeable future.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:58 am"All this crap flying around in here is just a waste of time. Get some moderates to take back your party, and then we’ll have a serious discussion."
Can you move back to your previous statement that congressmen/women exist to serve their representives? That seems mildly serious. If they aren't acting to give Bush expanded powers that implies that their constituents do not believe such powers are warranted.
Your fallback assumption is that Bush has large presidential powers, which include ignoring the USSC. (I do hope you know what the USSC is, and I assume that you do).
I'm all for the President protecting the American people but I'm also all for Congress being the sole law making body.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:59 amreal American ! hell no . REAL ROBOT , YES .
ROBOTS ! ROBOTS ! ROBOTS !
There is absolutly nothing to argue with an an emty shell , just a ROBOT .
December 20th, 2005 at 12:03 pmBoxer Asks Presidential Scholars About Former White House Counsel's Statement that Bush Admitted to an 'Impeachable Offense'
December 19, 2005
Washington, D.C. -- U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) today asked four presidential scholars for their opinion on former White House Counsel John Dean's statement that President Bush admitted to an "impeachable offense" when he said he authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without getting a warrant from a judge.
Boxer said, "I take very seriously Mr. Dean's comments, as I view him to be an expert on Presidential abuse of power. I am expecting a full airing of this matter by the Senate in the very near future."
Boxer's letter is as follows:
On December 16, along with the rest of America, I learned that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without getting a warrant from a judge. President Bush underscored his support for this action in his press conference today.
On Sunday, December 18, former White House Counsel John Dean and I participated in a public discussion that covered many issues, including this surveillance. Mr. Dean, who was President Nixon's counsel at the time of Watergate, said that President Bush is "the first President to admit to an impeachable offense." Today, Mr. Dean confirmed his statement.
This startling assertion by Mr. Dean is especially poignant because he experienced first hand the executive abuse of power and a presidential scandal arising from the surveillance of American citizens.
Given your constitutional expertise, particularly in the area of presidential impeachment, I am writing to ask for your comments and thoughts on Mr. Dean's statement.
Unchecked surveillance of American citizens is troubling to both me and many of my constituents. I would appreciate your thoughts on this matter as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Barbara Boxer
December 20th, 2005 at 12:03 pmUnited States Senator
#130 RemoveBush
Please note: there is NO WAITING TIME FOR A WARRANT UNDER FISA.
No waiting time for a FISA warrant. None. Zero. End of story.
NSA/FBI/President finds reason for to tap someone's phone for intelligence reasons. They do it immediately. Then they apply for a warrant 72 hours later. After that a judge reviews it, approves it (perhaps with modifications), and it becomes retroactive.
FISA Court has been in business since 78. They approved all warrants up until 02. Then there were 4 rejections, 3 of which were then modified, the fourth was appealed and won. This is a no brainer.
To all of you on this board arguing about FISA - there is no dispute that FISA allows for WARRANTLESS SEARCHES FOR 72 HOURS
December 20th, 2005 at 12:03 pmIn case you are wondering where the legal authority for a 72 hour warrantless search comes from please refer to HR 2883 Section 314 'Technical Ammendments'
Prior to 01 the period was 24 hours.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:05 pmHey, Mr. A REAL AMERICAN, your laundrywoman just called to say that your brownshirt uniform is all starched up and ready for your pep rally tonight.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:05 pmThe President spoke to this earlier and the Attorney General, who is, after all, the highest legal authority in the country, has spoken to this.
Why is your puny worthlessness
asking these silly questions!??
The Grand Puba has already spoken on this!
December 20th, 2005 at 12:06 pmIt's my understanding that the wiretapping without court approval has been going on since before the Iraq war, so the "time of war" argument is bullcrap. But you say "ever since 9/11, when when we were attacked by terrorists" Well, don't you think all branches of government should have been involved in changing laws and policies to be able to increase the ability to detect and stop terrorists? Every successful business puts employees through an exercise illustrating that solutions to problems are better found in a group, rather than by yourself. The "stranded at sea" exercise, you may already know it.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:07 pm#138
December 20th, 2005 at 12:07 pmPerhaps he can play the part of Rohm.
#140
Look at the 72 hour warrantless period. Yes, it has been. And I'm sure there have also been other similar secret orders (probably widespread during the cold war).
It appears that the justification is that Congress has 1. a role to play but 2. does not because 3. umm, they are but aren't representatives of the people and 4. therefore we the president, as a sort of protector, does what is necessary.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:09 pmGood point #142.
But if a warrent is unneccesary in the first 72 hours, (when time is most critical), why are these guys still ignoring the court? It appears the ability to act quickly is already in place. Just go back to the court later.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:25 pmThe answer is easy, For Truth...this administration vehemently opposes any oversight on its activities. Of course, this makes people wonder what the administration is up to...but once the administration cracks down on the media and prevents them from publishing anything critical, that will no longer be a problem.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:36 pmI’ll tell you, I don’t even know why I am slumming this hack website. It really doesn’t matter what you fools say, it really doesn’t. We, the Republican, conservative majority will keep winning every election as long as you have people like Clinton, Kerry, Kennedy, Durbin, Reid, and the rest of those schmucks running your party. All this crap flying around in here is just a waste of time. Get some moderates to take back your party, and then we’ll have a serious discussion.
Comment by A REAL AMERICAN
I'm here because it's fun to pull the wings off of Donkflies. Not only that but you never know when the Good Lord will see fit to allow one of them just a glimpse of themselves. Keep holding up the mirror.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:39 pmI wonder if he stands in front of a mirror and repeats this to himself, trying to get all the titles just right..."His Majesty, Supreme Ruler of the United States of America and of the World, Divinely Appointed Executor of all Heathen Evildoers, Defender of the Christian Nations, King George the First".
December 20th, 2005 at 12:40 pmI truly believe that IRI is a closet liberal who assumes hysterically extreme right-wing viewpoints as some form of satire.
The yolk of satire is on you until we can get enough rope.
Comment by MarcWW
December 20th, 2005 at 12:42 pmRICE IS PERHAPS THE DARKEST PRINCESS OF EVIL THAT EVER WALKED WITHIN A GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION. EVIL HAS ALWAYS BEEN DUMB. AND IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN CRUSHED.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:42 pmIt's not like it was Bush that said it, we know he's an idiot, but Rice should have known better. I consider it a major slip.
Also, just now Scott McClellen called Alberto Gonzalez "General Gonzalez". Strange...
December 20th, 2005 at 12:46 pmI wonder if he stands in front of a mirror and repeats this to himself, trying to get all the titles just right…â€His Majesty, Supreme Ruler of the United States of America and of the World, Divinely Appointed Executor of all Heathen Evildoers, Defender of the Christian Nations, King George the Firstâ€.
Comment by MarcWW
If the foo shits wear it but I think he's content with "President of the United States of America, Most Powerful Man on Earth & Friend of Christ Jesus".
December 20th, 2005 at 12:47 pm#152
It is apparant that Bush is not the only member of the administration that cannot speak without a piece of paper in front of them. Perhaps the pressure of holding up the admin on falsehoods is getting to them.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:52 pm#145
I’m here because it’s fun to pull the wings off of Donkflies. Not only that but you never know when the Good Lord will see fit to allow one of them just a glimpse of themselves. Keep holding up the mirror.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 20, 2005 @ 12:39 pm
Giacomo - see what I mean about people being in here to convert? IRI just admitted it. Problem is, coming from someone who has lived on both sides of that fence, the grass is greener on the liberal side, and all this does is to convince us here that we're where we should be.
IRI, it was that mirror that converted me to this side. It's why you won't look directly in it yourself.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:56 pm#146
I wonder if he stands in front of a mirror and repeats this to himself, trying to get all the titles just right…â€His Majesty, Supreme Ruler of the United States of America and of the World, Divinely Appointed Executor of all Heathen Evildoers, Defender of the Christian Nations, King George the Firstâ€.
Comment by MarcWW — December 20, 2005 @ 12:40 pm
Probably while outfitted in something from Donna Karan's evening collection for large women.
December 20th, 2005 at 12:58 pmIRI loves funhouse mirrors. }:(
December 20th, 2005 at 1:00 pmFirst, it seems to me that she slipped and didn't actually mean that the buck stops with Alberto. I'm sure if she thought about it, she would realize she is technically wrong.
That said, it certainly is a Freudian slip of hilarious magnitude because she, as well as the rest of the administration, think that Alberto is truly "the highest legal authority in the country."
Wishful thinking. This is an example of how Repubs think that a nationist Republic with stricter laws under one authority is ideal.
I think it is about as anti-democratic (as in democracy) as a political party can get.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:02 pmI tell you what! We always hear from these typical conservatives that "liberals are elitists and snobs, and that they look down on the average American."
Looking at this schmo's name "A Real American" just shows you how, with their "Heart of America" BS and "We are real Americans" BS that they are truly the elitists. I mean for Christ's sake! They think they, and only they, have God on their side! Ha!
Does anyone find it ironic that these guys are the same ones that are war-mongering, anti-tax, pro-death penalty, anti-society Republicans?
December 20th, 2005 at 1:07 pmEven giving Condi the benefit of the doubt that she was referring only to the executive branch, she's still wrong. The President is the highest legal authority. In fact, republicans couldn't stop referring to Clinton as "The chief law enforcement officer in the land" leading up to his impeachment. The AG is the top legal advisor to the President.
But we already knew that they don't understand the basics of the federal government.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:09 pmIRI is the definition of the 'blind leading the blind'. she talks about mirrors holding up mirrors to others, but clearly never uses one herself... and her comments are always projections of her own kkk, nazi and retarded values. poor little stupid thing is so deluded that she believes murder and torture and that love and peace are evil. that's truly a lost soul who's damned.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:11 pmCondi is a fool...
December 20th, 2005 at 1:11 pmThe only thing worse than having Rice lecture us about civics is having Bush lecture us about civics. What a pair of feckless turds. I don't give a crap that Condi has a doctorate. She is still ignorant of much of the world outside her comfort zone.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:14 pmRyan. I appreciate your point of view and for the most part I have the same point of view. I am also amazed at the stupidity shown by Bush supporters like IRI and wwalace and the like just as you are. BUT Why do you include, in your insults, references to these trolls as woman? Are you saying that to be a woman is to be idiotic like these trolls? Men are more than capable of asinine behaviour and having stupid beliefs. When you do this, you insult woman who have similar beliefs that you have and makes you appear childish.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:18 pm#159 -
Would you say that they don't understand the basics of the federal government, or that they don't care?
My opinion is that this administration believes it can make up its own rules. This may sound stupid, but I must admit that this administration scares me.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:19 pmI-Right-I,
The last time Rethuglicans had a decent discussion with even moderate Dems was before the Rethuglicans got control of the House. Since then, and especially since the Senate fell into the evil hands of the GOP, the Rethuglicans have run Congress like their own Politburo.
What you repugnant slobs really want is an opposition party in name only- a party that play-acts at a two-party system but rubberstamps everything der Fuhrer wants.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:20 pm#162
As a woman, I take no offense in Ryan refering to IRI as a woman. I know that he says this because IRI and his ilk do think women are inferior and as a result, his comments are insulting them, not women.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:24 pmIt is common knowledge that Gonzales is a close friend, ally and apologist for this administration.
And once again this administration thinks that they are going to slip under the radar again, by investigating themselves with their own allies.
This is going to take a bi-partisan board of review. Something we know Mr. Bush is sweating.
December 20th, 2005 at 1:37 pmSo she misspoke? Who cares, she’s still hot.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
I-Trite-I #24,
I've got things in my freezer hotter than she is.
While commenting on Cundti's gaffe, let's not forget that it wasn't that long ago that one of the Bushite inbred apologist propagandists informed us all that:
"Repu(gliscum) create our own reality."
December 20th, 2005 at 2:01 pmJudd, you know what she meant, you lying weasel.
Comment by wwallace
wwallace#1,
She "meant" exactly what she "said". She got that promotion from NS Adviser to SOS (even after dropping the ball on pre-Sept. 11th intel) BECAUSE she (like her boss)doesn't know her a*s from a hole in the ground.
December 20th, 2005 at 2:04 pmBUT Why do you include, in your insults, references to these trolls as woman? Are you saying that to be a woman is to be idiotic like these trolls?
Comment by Bob Loblaw
Bob,
Chill, it's been ascertained that most of these inbred "trolls" are also cross dressers (a behavior acquired from their cheerleading god Bushiva, his paramour Jeff Gannon, and their grandfathers J. Edgar Hoover and Clyde Tolefson.)
December 20th, 2005 at 2:12 pm"BUT Why do you include, in your insults, references to these trolls as woman? Are you saying that to be a woman is to be idiotic like these trolls?" Bob
Not at all, actually 'real' women are much smarter than any of these trolls. They however possess 'anxious masculinity' which makes them doubt their 'masculinity', and I point it out to them because it's fitting. In particular IRI and wwallace have both been identified as 'closet homosexuals' ala Gannon, and that largely serves as the basis of the descriptions I give to them. They hate this aspect of themselves, and this drives their bigotry, so I remind them of it. Most of the trolls in fact hate women and femininity to the core because they are rejecting it in themselves, as you'll find by the many insults they hurl at gays and women at various points.
But thanks for your concern, and I do understand how I could have created that. Sorry you didn't have the 'context' of my comments from earlier threads...
December 20th, 2005 at 2:31 pmThen why ever are you here? Please, enlighten us with more of your complimenting wit…
Comment by unbelievable
Ok, fine I will. The reason I'm here is because of large breasted liberal women like you who are easy.
December 20th, 2005 at 2:44 pmThanks Ryan. I understand where your comming from as far as the context of your comments. I suppose I'd rather not see insults come from the left regardless of what the insult is or the reason for insulting. That's just me and I will continue to cope as I have for 40 odd years. I am certainly not innocent of hurling insults but I do try.
Tis the season for good will toward all. Unless your Bill O'Reilly of course.
December 20th, 2005 at 2:59 pmWhat you repugnant slobs really want is an opposition party in name only- a party that play-acts at a two-party system but rubberstamps everything der Fuhrer wants.
Comment by Redleg
No, what we really want is a "loyal opposition" instead of a bunch of ratbastardcommiemofo traitors pretending to love their country. I've said for the longest time to people who care that you can't be a Democrat and a Christian. It's just not possible. Now, I'm saying you can't be a Democrat and an American. The two have become antithetical to one another.
Stock tip: ACME Hemp and Razor Wire is up .30/share since I first mentioned it the other day.
December 20th, 2005 at 3:01 pmI-Right-I,
It's good for us you don't get to decide who is Christian and who is American.
To you, "the loyal opposition" are people like Zell Miller- rabid nutcases who jumped on the Bush bandwagon because they know the day will come when Bush is truly king and any opposition will be locked up in re-education camps. That is your version of the ideal society. Then you and your swinish ilk can go about getting rid of the Civil Rights Act, the Wagner Act, the New Deal, the Environment Protection Act and any other act you think cuts into corporate profits.
December 20th, 2005 at 3:12 pmAlberto uses that "highest legal authority in the country" line on all the chicks. Condi fell for it.
December 20th, 2005 at 3:17 pmOk, fine I will. The reason I’m here is because of large breasted liberal women like you who are easy.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 20, 2005 @ 2:44 pm
So how's that working for ya?
Didn't think so...
December 20th, 2005 at 3:53 pmShe did NOT say that!?!? Holy smokes, these people are drunk with power...facists in the making.
God help us all, save us from these evil people.
December 20th, 2005 at 4:16 pmBy the way, I have to admit a preference for large-breasted liberal women who are easy as well. In fact, I have a theory that explains why Republican men are so close-minded, mean, and angry...they're around those bird-brained neo-con right-wing Republican women, and never get laid.
Of course, my theory doesn't explain how women who would naturally be caring and attentive to others could become bird-brained neo-con right-wing Republicans. I have to think about that one a little more.
December 20th, 2005 at 4:17 pmI thought wwallace was fraudulent enough until I came across the like of real american. Then the phrase "don't know why I patronize..." It's because you have no influence, no wealth, ra, that you can afford to be here. Think the real players, the movers and shakers of your party, have the time for websites? They don't.
Which means, de facto, you possess neither power nor truth. Nor ever will. You may be american - by accident of birth - but you sure ain't real. How pathetic.
December 20th, 2005 at 4:54 pm#178
Sex is a four letter word to the Neocons (sexx), unless,of course, you're making babies for Jesus. Unfortunately for IRI, I am neither easy nor interested in him.
December 20th, 2005 at 5:30 pmReal American: if the President is trying to protect us, why does he IGNORE memos that read, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States," then tries to hide the memo from the country?
December 20th, 2005 at 5:42 pm-Right-I,
It’s good for us you don’t get to decide who is Christian and who is American.
To you, “the loyal opposition†are people like Zell Miller- rabid nutcases who jumped on the Bush bandwagon because they know the day will come when Bush is truly king and any opposition will be locked up in re-education camps. That is your version of the ideal society. Then you and your swinish ilk can go about getting rid of the Civil Rights Act, the Wagner Act, the New Deal, the Environment Protection Act and any other act you think cuts into corporate profits.
Comment by Redleg
It's all about freedom equality and fraternity baby. We were doing OK before the Liberals started to tell everyone how to think, act and what to do with our money. Funny but it's you losers who have purchased security with our freedom.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:01 pmThink the real players, the movers and shakers of your party, have the time for websites? They don’t.
Comment by ash
Yes I do.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:02 pmSo how’s that working for ya?
Didn’t think so…
Comment by unbelievable
It's only because I'm not really trying. Everybody knows you liberal chicks hold your vows about as sacrad as you do your hair dresser.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:04 pm#184
It’s only because I’m not really trying.
Yes you are.
Everybody knows you liberal chicks hold your vows about as sacrad as you do your hair dresser.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 20, 2005 @ 6:04 pm
Vows? To what? You forget I grew up religious, so I was indoctrinated to feel guilty about casual sex. Sorry, I know you would like to believe I'm easy, but it's actually the preacher's daughter you should be after...
December 20th, 2005 at 6:12 pmIRI, I heard that the neo-con right-wing chicks hold their hair dressers very sacred...they want their hair to look absolutely perfect during the weekly cross-burning ceremonies.
Unbelievable, I was unfortunate enough to never become friendly with a nice easy preacher's daughter during high school, but I know a preacher's son who was one of the biggest bullies and jerks in my class. As might be the case with IRI, according to another theory I'm developing, he was probably over-compensating for homosexual tendencies.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:24 pmMarcWW,
It's only a 'tendency' until you act on it, IRI is clearly beyond tendencies :()
As for honoring 'vows' - how ironic a 'divorced' conservatives would have the guts to lecture others on the topic. Hypocrisy and mental retardation are the two characteristics you can guarantee a reichwinger like IRI to possess.
December 20th, 2005 at 6:43 pmEverybody knows you liberal chicks hold your vows about as sacrad as you do your hair dresser.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 20, 2005 @ 6:04 pm
More sanctimony from I-RIGHT-I. This is the same guy who was boasting about sleeping with a 19yo illegal East German woman, out of wedlock.
So, I-RIGHT-I, who is the highest legal authority in the US?
December 20th, 2005 at 6:49 pm#186
Marc,
My experience, growing up in the South was that the preacher's kids were the most willing to do the things they were raised to avoid. Not surprised to hear about your high school's bully being one... (I'm sure there are exceptions, like anything else, so apologize to the chaste preacher's daughters...)
December 20th, 2005 at 6:59 pmI also grew up in the South, so I'm sure we have similar experiences. I actually knew a preacher's daughter that was a fine person, and we were good friends. It is dangerous to generalize. I guess that was the whole point of what we were talking about, though...IRI was spewing invective and insults, and I at least was making fun of his posts generalizing all those who dare disagree with him.
December 20th, 2005 at 7:12 pmYeah, I try not to generalize either... just trying to find IRI a girlfriend so he'll quit flirting with me. :)
December 20th, 2005 at 7:18 pmDo you know a woman you hate that much?
December 20th, 2005 at 7:19 pmI-Right-I,
December 20th, 2005 at 8:04 pmHow are you and your party in power ever going to pay off this huge, unprecedented national debt Bush has racked up? You used to call the Dems the tax and spend party- the Rethugs are even worse, they give big tax breaks to the wealthy and spend, spend, spend like there's no end to it. And they don't account for the spending either- 9 billion missing from the CPA in Iraq? No big deal. Cost overruns and blatant ripoffs by KBR? No problemo. When the hell is your Laffer curve going to kick in. LOL, you sorry trickle-down losers.
#192
Marc,
Hmmm... tough one, but I'd have to go with Barbara Bush. But she peobably wouldn't be interested either :)
December 20th, 2005 at 8:11 pmhelp stop this country from becoming a fundamentalist theocrisy aiding and abetting a kleptocratic war profiteering police state that continues to remove civil liberties from americans under the premise of fighting a never ending war on a transative adverb
December 20th, 2005 at 8:32 pmMarcWW,
IRI hates women because he's fat, stupid, gross and psychotic. clearly his wife divorced him because he's such a pathetic loser. he's projecting all of his deficiencies and hatred on any 'scapegoat' he considers weak, and being a retarded redneck, these are women and people of color. IRI exhibits classic anxious masculinity and psychotic responses to his own unskilled social set and inablity to integrate his failures as his own.
December 20th, 2005 at 10:44 pm#196
Exactly why I think humankind invented marriage. So that fat pigs like IRI could coerce women into sleeping with them and doing their chores. Culturally, we attach way too much stigma to women for their maritial status. Also why I am against most organized religions, because it gives men like IRI a platform to exploit women and keep them the weaker sex, despite the fact that he can't win a debate against me. So, he flirts with me in an attempt to insult me into submission, because he doesn't know any women in his real life who don't fall for that trick (or rather, they won't know him). Only, because I have healthy self-esteem and am aware of his puerile antics, they don't work. So now he either makes a chauvantistic quip or ignores my posts to him. I just like making him squirm, remind him that there are women smarter and stronger than he is.
December 21st, 2005 at 8:39 amunbelievable- You go girl! You are so strong to point out how strong you are....I know the strongest and smartest people I know ALWAYS tell me how strong and smart they are because it's so hard to notice them if they don't say anything. SWEET strategy! YOU are a genius! Watch out, IRI... She's brilliant!
January 2nd, 2006 at 3:17 pmcpa review school
Didn't realise there was this type of information out there
March 23rd, 2008 at 11:02 amCan I Use My Computer Moniter As My Tv
how to watch tv on my computer
March 27th, 2008 at 3:06 amGay Incest Old Gay Men Gay Male Galleries
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 1st, 2008 at 10:22 amJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:05 pmElizabeth
I just came across your blog and wanted to drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with the information you have posted here. I also have websites & blogs so I know what I am talking about when I say your site is top-notch! Keep up the great w...
April 5th, 2008 at 2:32 amAuto Financing
If your dad craves a White , It is easy to be presented with} an} car loan in
April 6th, 2008 at 8:35 pmGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 8th, 2008 at 6:27 amAdult Baby Websites
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:35 amGregory
Wow! This was a really enlightening article.
April 9th, 2008 at 4:06 pmSex Gay Sex Anime Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 9th, 2008 at 7:53 pmChubby Grannies Chubby Granny Masturbate Pussy Big Tit Chubby Grannys
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 10th, 2008 at 12:17 pmGay Incest Gay Cumshots Gay Jock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 11th, 2008 at 2:55 pmGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 11th, 2008 at 8:54 pm